THE OPERA[1] owes its rise to the attempt which was made in Florence at
the beginning of the sixteenth century to discover the musical method of
ancient tragedy and to reproduce it in conformity to the spirit of the
Renaissance.[2]
{GRADUAL RISE OF OPERA.}
(155)
In opposition to the predominant madrigal style of part-singing, worked
out in counterpoint, there arose strivings after a method which should
give freedom and independence to the solo singer, and which should
render the poet's words comprehensible and sympathetic to the hearer.
The conviction that this was accomplished to perfection in ancient
tragedy led to a search after lost musical traditions, traces of which
are observable in the opera seria, even in its latest development.
First, recitative was introduced as a middle course between song and
ordinary speech, distinguished by accent and rhythm, and sustained by
a simple harmony, which emphasised the dialogue. Time and effort were
needed to establish this compromise between song and speech, and to
convert recitative into the pliable, expressive instrument of musical
dialogue.
The first attempt to place an opera in this _stilo rappresentativo_
on the stage was made by Jac. Peri with Ottavio Rinuccini's "Dafne,"
performed in 1594 at the Palazzo Corsi;[3] the same poet's "Euridice"
followed in 1600, publicly performed on the occasion of the marriage
of Henry IV. with Marie de Medicis. The whole dialogue is rendered in
a simply accompanied recitative, without the introduction of anything
resembling an air; to this are added choruses, after the example of the
old tragedies, not worked out in contrapuntal form like madrigals, as
was already the custom with the intermedii of spoken tragedies, but in
simple harmonies, and in a key corresponding to the recitatives.
A similar experiment was made in Rome in 1600 by Emilio de' Cavalieri
with his oratorio "Dell' Anima e del Corpo," and in Florence the same
year by Giulio Caccini with another, "Euridice," which displayed the art
of the singers by its numerous embellishments and passages.
Musical language, however, could only attain its full effect when
the more elevated sentiments received their due expression in an air,
independent in character and
{OPERA SERIA.}
(156)
perfect in form. The development of solo singing released from its
contrapuntal bondage, and made expressive by melody, was largely due
to Caccini. The merit of connecting the air with the recitative
in opera--for which a precedent was found in the monody of ancient
tragedy--belongs to Claudio Monteverde, who also made use of the whole
available instrumental wealth of the time. His operas of "Orfeo,"
composed in Mantua (1607), and "Arianna" (1608) were followed in Venice,
where he was appointed kapellmeister (1613), by "Proserpina rapita"
(1630), "Adone" (1639), &c. Here, then, were the elements of the opera
seria. To follow its continuous development step by step would require
such a searching study of details as has not yet been undertaken. The
majority of existing accounts are made apparently at random, and without
any idea of connection or dependence. A sketch of the leading points in
the progress of this development will suffice for our purpose.[4]
Ancient tragedy being taken as a model, it followed that the stories of
ancient mythology or history (they were always considered on the same
level) were almost exclusively chosen, although treated for the most
part in a widely different spirit.
Opera soon formed an important feature in court festivals, and it
became customary to give the text a reference to the festival or person
honoured by turning it into an allegory, in which poetical fancy vied
with personal flattery.[5] In imitation of ancient tragedy mimic dances
were connected with the singing, but the union of the arts tended more
to sensual enjoyment than to poetical effect. The naïve freedom with
which the ancient myths were handled gave ample license for gaudy
costumes, scenery, and decorations, and the same taste was carried into
the fantastic outcome of these festival representations known as the
German magic opera.
The courts of Italy and France vied with each other in
{DEVELOPMENT OF OPERA--SCARLATTI.}
(157)
the costly splendour lavished on the opera by scene-painters,
decorators, and costumiers; and Vienna, Munich, Dresden, and Stuttgart
were not slow to follow their example. The elegantly printed books of
the words, adorned with careful copper-plate engravings, which were
distributed for these performances, give some idea of the style in which
they were put on the stage, and of the dazzle and glitter in the midst
of which the music became a very secondary consideration.
Such operas as we have described could, on account of the expense, only
be given at royal courts on special occasions; but the general public
soon began to demand a share in the entertainment and a regular
repetition of it. It became the established custom to make the opera the
main festivity of the Carnival, and although generous patrons were
not wanting, prepared to support the managers (_impresarii_), yet the
latter, who naturally wished to make a profit by the opera, generally
found it necessary to reduce the cost of the representations. The
libretti, which sought to excite interest by showy scenery, and a
mixture of pathetic and burlesque situations, without the least regard
to consistency or psychological accuracy, were far from satisfactory to
any cultivated taste. But the cultivation of the art of song exercised
the highest of all influences on operatic music. It had reached a height
from which it was able to govern the musical public, and to render the
pleasure of the eye subservient to that of the ear. In proportion as the
vocal art asserted its superiority, it exacted a simplification of all
other means of attraction, and the universal striving after regularity
was materially assisted by the necessity for clear and decided forms in
vocal music.
This transformation of the opera, which took its final form from
poet and composer under the quickening influence of great singers,
is commonly ascribed to Alessandro Scarlatti (1659-1725). He was the
disciple, although perhaps not the pupil, of the Roman kapellmeister,
Giacomo Carissimi (who was nearly ninety in 1672), who did such good
service to the development of recitative and dramatic solo singing, that
he may be considered the founder of modern song.
Scarlatti, excellent alike from his thorough musical
{OPERA SERIA.}
(158)
knowledge, and from the wealth and grace of his invention, displayed
astonishing fertility in the different departments of musical art.
In the year 1715, according to his own account, he had composed 106
operas.[6] At Naples, where he passed the greater part of his life,
he founded the school from which (more especially under his successor
Francesco Durante, 1693-1755) a long list of composers issued, who for
the most part wrote admirable church music, but whose chief mission it
was to maintain throughout the last century an uninterrupted succession
of operatic music. If we glance down the long list of the more
famous--Nic. Porpora (1685 or 1687-1767), Dom. Sarri (1688-1732), Leon.
Vinci (1690-1734), Franc. Feo (1694-1740), Leon. Leo (1694-1756?),
Ad. Hasse (1699-1783), Terradeglias (17...-1754), Nic. Logroscino
(17...-1763), Pergolese (1707-1739), Pasq. Cafaro (1708-1787), Duni
(1709-1775), Dav. Perez (1711-1778), Nic. Jomelli (1714-1774), Rinaldo
da Capua (b. 1715), Tom. Traetta (1727-1779), Guglielmi (1727-1804),
Nic. Piccinni (1728-1800), Sacchini (1735-1786), Pasq. Anfossi
(1736-1797), Giac. Paisiello (1741-1816), Franc, de Majo (1745-1774),
Dom. Cimarosa (1754-1801)--we shall be astonished to find that of the
numerous members of the Neapolitan school only four were born out of the
kingdom of Naples,[7] viz., Hasse, Terradeglias, Pergolese, and Guglielmi.
The rest of Italy was quite unable to compete with this wealth.
Venice, however, took an important place in the development of Italian
opera, both by the splendour of the performances given in the theatre,
which was erected in 1637,[8] and by excellent institutions for musical
education. The fame of the Venetian school was upheld by many celebrated
composers, among them Carlo Pallavicini (16...-1688), Agost. Steffani
(1655-1730). Franc. Gasparini (1665-1737), Ant. Lotti
{ITALIAN INFLUENCES ON OPERA.}
(159)
(1667-1740), Giov. Porta (16...-1740), Ant. Caldara (1678-1763), Buranello
(1703-1785), Ferd. Bertoni (1725-1813).
Bologna too had its share in the history of the opera, maintaining
a firm tradition of careful performances,[9] and excellent schools for
singing and composition; Giov. Buonon-cini (1672-1752) and Gius. Sarti
(1729-1802) were trained here.
Rome was looked upon as the city where the keenest enthusiasm either
of applause or adverse criticism was to be expected, consequently where
artistic reputations were most often made or destroyed;[10] but Rome was
neither the birthplace nor the seminary of any famous operatic masters.
It is not necessary here to inquire into the details of the part taken
by Scarlatti in the erection of Italian opera as it now exists. His
operas are truly epitomes of the history of musical development, and
his many imitators and successors pass before us like the shadows of the
Homeric shades; but we have only to do with him or with them in so far
as concerns the main features of that form of operatic composition which
Mozart found ready to hand.[11]
The stability with which operatic development kept close to the path
which had at first been marked out was due partly to circumstances and
the influence of public opinion, partly to the character of the Italian
people. Beauty, appealing immediately and directly to their lightly
kindled imaginations, required that its sensual charm should be clearly
and unreservedly expressed; and for this they were willing to sacrifice
novelty and characterisation. Again, the art of music was developed in
accordance with natural laws; and having once acquired forms indicative
of its essential elements, it grasped these firmly, and refused to
abandon them until they had become completely obsolete. It was the task
of the great masters of the eighteenth century to
{OPERA SERIA.}
(160)
maintain this course of steady imperceptible progress, and, by raising
to successive stages each hardly won step towards perfection, to
establish in the end a new and more admirable whole.
The chief component parts of the opera were the recitative and the song,
or aria.[12] Recitative, intended for the rendering of conversation,
approaches in rhythm and intervals as near as possible to ordinary
speech, and leaves the singer ample scope for an animated and expressive
delivery. This is assisted by a simple harmonious accompaniment, the
basses giving the fundamental, the clavier the harmony. The simplicity
of the musical treatment lends itself to characteristic declamation, and
impressive situations are thrown into relief generally by sudden changes
of harmony; numerous instances show the importance that was attached to
this mode of delivery. But very soon it became the fashion to treat this
_recitativo secco_ as subordinate, and the composer strove to do away
with it as far as possible. Certain turns, certain harmonic progressions
and interrupted cadences, were as indispensable to recitative as many
turns of speech are to social intercourse. As the course and development
of the action of the piece depend almost entirely on the recitative,
it follows that any neglect of the latter must affect one of the most
important elements of the opera. The need for attaining the power of
expressing a momentary passion or inspiration which would not admit of
an elaborate representation led to the introduction of the so-called
accompanied (obligate) recitative. For this the orchestra (at first only
the whole body of stringed instruments) was made use of, and accompanied
the alternations of emotion with corresponding musical phrases
or interludes. Recitative, without abandoning its distinctive
characteristics, became more strongly accentuated, and in process of
time passed over into song. Such vocal melodies as seemed thus to be
called forth by the emotions of the situations were called _cavata_ or
_cavatina_. At first they were
{RECITATIVE--THE ARIA.}
(161)
considered as an ingredient or embellishment of the recitative, but later
on they were treated independently. _Arioso_ in the recitative indicates
an interpolated passage of vocal melody. A rapid alternation of varied
or contending emotions in monologue or dialogue called for accompanied
recitative, which generally passed into a song, where a definite emotion
might find its due expression. It was here that singers and composers
sought to accomplish the highest degree of dramatic expression, and
although in the aria they might be tempted to an undue regard for
musical display, to the neglect of dramatic effect, here at least they
strove for a faithful portrayal of human sentiment.
The aria was the almost exclusive form given to regular artistic song.
Choruses, which formerly concluded every act, were afterwards only
exceptionally employed, generally when the occasion, being a court
festivity, required additional outward show; they very seldom formed
an integral part of the performance.[13] Ballets, which were originally
combined with the choruses, became by degrees quite distinct, and
were given between the acts of the opera. Concerted vocal pieces were
confined within limits more and more strictly defined, until the rule
came to be that in every opera there should be a duet for the prima
donna and the primo uomo, and a terzet in which the primo tenore also
took part; even the places for these, at the end of the second and third
acts, were appointed. Further restrictions were imposed on the character
of these concerted pieces by the necessity of giving all possible effect
to the voices. They do not pretend to represent a conflict of struggling
passions, pressing onward to the catastrophe; rather does some definite
mood, the natural result of the situations which have preceded it, find
its fitting expression in their regular concerted form, which affords
ample scope for the display of varieties in quality and style of the
individual voices.
The aria, which gave expression to a fixed lyrical mood, was seldom
the culminating point of a dramatic situation; its connection with the
action of the piece was, for the most
{OPERA SERIA.}
(162)
part, only sufficient to give it a certain local colour. It was the task
of both composer and singer to make the aria fit in to the drama; but
the claims of the vocalist were paramount in its composition. As the
canons of operatic construction became more and more strictly defined,
distinctions arose between different kinds of arie, each having its
own character and form; the _aria cantabile_ was for sentimental
declamation, _di portamento_ for long drawn-out tones, _di mezzo
carattere_ for dramatic expression, _aria parlante_ or _agitata_ for the
expression of passion, _aria di bravura (agilità)_ for the display of
artistic skill of every kind.[14] The poet and composer had only to be
careful to suit the arie to the performers, and so to distribute them
through the opera that their variety should place the performances of
each character in their most favourable light.[15] But a certain
fixed form served as a groundwork to all arie, and kept them within
well-defined bounds. It is easy to trace the simple expressive phrase as
it is extended and rounded into a well-formed melody, and then to
follow the different subjects so obtained until, by progressions and
interludes, they are welded into a whole. But this led to a petrifying
formalism, and to a tedious lengthening of the aria, which sacrificed
character to vocal display.
An aria regularly consists of two parts differing in key, time, and
measure. An allegro in common time usually begins, introduced by a
slower passage in triple time; but as to this there is no fixed rule,
and free scope as to details is given to the composer. The first
movement is broadly conceived, always with a view to the skill of the
performer; he repeats one or more of the principal melodies in different
positions, but without thematic elaboration, and inserts runs and
passages.
In the second part the composer, granting some repose to the singer,
made a display of his own art by selected harmonies, elaborate
accompaniments, and so forth. It was
{THE ARIA.}
(163)
essential to the singer's reputation as an artist that he should be
able to vary the modulation and embellishment of the melody each time
it recurred, the composer supplying a mere outline, and leaving the
execution of the cadenzas entirely to the discretion of the performer.
This task became more difficult as the custom grew of repeating the
whole of the first part at the close of the second, thus turning the
latter into a middle movement; for no singer would be deterred from
enhancing the interest of each repetition by a fresh mode of delivery.
So that the public performers of that day displayed their taste and
cultivation not only, as at present, by execution and declamation; they
worked of necessity side by side with the composer, whose special glory
it was to inspire his singers with a spark of his own creative genius.
The influence thus exerted by the executive artist could not fail
to determine, to a great extent, the path of development in operatic
composition. The great names of the more celebrated singers are to us
indeed but names, for contemporary notices give us no clear idea of
their performances,[16] and the music written for them, deprived of
the direct charm of their personal impression, affords a most imperfect
standard of judgment.
From the middle of the last century the tendency to sacrifice all
consideration to execution (bravura) became more and more marked; until
at last, dramatic propriety, and the soul-inspiring calm of beautiful
song, were alike buried beneath the weight of ornamentation and
exaggerated flourishes,[17] serving only to display the pretensions of
the vocalist and the dexterity of the composer. In this way the dramatic
element of the opera became more and more neglected, until at last
it was regarded as a superfluous and disturbing adjunct to the
vocalisation.[18]
{OPERA SERIA.}
(164)
The public too grew accustomed to confine their attention to the
individual exploits of their favourites;[19] and the composer, unwilling
to waste his energy on thankless parts, followed the example, and
devoted his whole powers to a few individuals.[20]
The enormous salary paid to celebrated singers, male and female, had the
effect of limiting the number of principal parts to three or four, each
distinguished as primo.[21] The remaining parts were treated by both
the poet and the composer as subordinate, not only on account of the
mediocre powers available for their representation, but also and chiefly
because it would have been against the interests of the great singers
that secondary characters should attract notice or applause. They
controlled all secondary parts, suppressing or appropriating any song
which they considered too brilliant, and leaving the author to arrange
the piece as best he might.[22] There was a fixed code of etiquette in
all stage arrangements. The prima donna, for instance, was entitled to
have her train borne by one, or if a princess, by two pages; she took
the place of honour at the right of the stage, being, as a rule, the
most important personage of the piece. When Faustina Hasse played
Dircea, in "Demofoonte" (1748), who is not recognised as a princess
until late in the piece, she claimed precedence over the acknowledged
Princess Creusa, and Metastasio himself was obliged to interfere in
order to induce her to yield the point.[23]
Thus all influences combined to mould the opera seria into a narrow
conventional form, in which all other considerations were sacrificed
to executive effect, and the display of skill and sensibility in the
rendering of the music.
We can form no clear conception whatever of the operatic
{INSTRUMENTATION--THE OVERTURE.}
(165)
orchestra in its earliest form; both the use and the effect of various
instruments are very imperfectly known, and the instrumentation is
consequently more or less incomprehensible. But here too development
proceeded in the way of simplification, and at the time of Scarlatti
the treatment of instrumental accompaniment and the disposal of the
orchestra was determined as to essentials for all future times.
In the plain recitative of the dialogue, the fundamental note was
given by the bass, and the chord was struck on the piano (at which the
composer or kapellmeister conducted) and repeated as often as necessary.
In the songs and _ensembles_ the instruments came in as accompaniments,
freed from the obligation of following a given melody step by step with
a given bass, according to the rules of thoroughbass for filling up
harmonies. Scarlatti and the earlier masters kept this accompaniment
very simple, seldom introducing more than one part in addition to the
bass and the voice. But, as practised contrapuntists, they could handle
the accompanying parts broadly and freely, and could give animation
by simple means. This art gradually decreased, and the accompaniment,
although fuller, became more mechanical and dependent, Only here and
there suggesting contrapuntal elaboration. The orchestra was used
independently only in the symphonies which repeated the motifs of the
songs, in the short interludes of accompanied recitative, and finally in
the introductory overture or sinfonia.
Italian operatic composers began by making use of the form of overture
which Lully had established in France, beginning with an adagio,
followed by a quick movement, often in the form of a fugue, and passing
again into an adagio, which concludes the overture. Later, the form
was determined which has remained ever since, of three movements:
an allegro, a slower, shorter movement contrasting in time,
instrumentation, and expression, and a concluding allegro, animated and
often noisy.
These main features were capable of rich and varied development, were it
not that in Italy little importance was attached to the overture, which
was commonly regarded as a
{OPERA SERIA.}
(166)
means of reducing the audience to silence and attention. The three
movements, therefore, generally preserved their gradations without
marked characteristics, and the attempt to express the effect of the
first scene by means of the overture was soon abandoned.[24]
The grouping of Scarlatti's orchestra was in its main points identical
with that of the present day. The stringed instruments, violins, tenors,
and basses formed its main strength; but their application was very
simple. The violon-celli go regularly with the double-basses, and the
tenors serve generally only to strengthen the bass; where they are
independent they are often divided, like the violins, which however
frequently go together. The oboe has the chief part among the wind
instruments, the flutes serving mainly for variety and special
characteristics; the bassoons strengthen the bass, and are rarely used
independently. Soon horns were employed, and drums and trumpets when
special splendour was required; trombones were used in the churches,
never in the opera.
In this manner even the largest orchestras were arranged down to the
close of the last century; an example is afforded by the construction
and arrangement of the Dresden orchestra by Hasse, which was considered
as a model.[25] [See Page Image]
{THE ORCHESTRA--INSTRUMENTALISTS.}
(167)
The well-appointed bass parts are the most striking, intended as a firm
foundation for the vocal melody, which is not seldom strengthened by the
violins and oboes or flutes. But to avoid any effect of poverty, it
must not be forgotten that the accompanist at the piano filled in the
harmony. To strengthen this, and to give variety to the intonation, was
the task of the wind instruments. But when the orchestra was treated
as a whole there was seldom any attempt to render lights and shades
by alternations of the instruments; to attain this end, concerted solo
instruments were employed.
Italy was, during the eighteenth century, at once the mother and
the nurse of instrumental musicians. A succession of first-rate
violinists--Arcang. Corelli (1653-1713), Franc. Geminiani (1680-1762),
Ant. Vivaldi (16...-1743), Gius. Tartini (1692-1770), Pietro
Nardini (1722-1793), Gaet. Pugnani (1727-1803), Ant. Lolli
(1733-1802)--established the glory of violin-playing, and raised it to
an extraordinary height of excellence; while as oboists the brothers
Besozzi, Alessandro (1700-1775), Antonio (1707-1781), Gaetano
(1727-1793) were performers of the first merit. Trumpets were at that
time more especially considered as solo instruments.
Not until later could Germany compete successfully with Italy, as far
as the orchestra was concerned; in France, although the precision
of Parisian orchestras was always remarkable, the development
of instrumental music was longest delayed. Scarlatti introduced
instrumental soloists in the operatic orchestra, and the effect was the
same as on the stage; it worked against the careful striving after a
perfect whole, and the tendency of the instrumental artists to enter
into competition with the vocalists led in no small degree to that
treatment of the voice as a mere instrument which was so much to be
deplored. Notably Farinelli in 1722 established his reputation in Rome
by a contest with a wonderful trumpeter, whom he twice vanquished in the
sustenance and artistic delivery of a long note, and in the execution of
difficult passages.[26]
{OPERA SERIA.}
(168)
The first step towards simplifying opera seria in its new form was made
in the diction and treatment of the plot. The subject-matter continued
to be taken from the stories of mythology or ancient history; but
effects of magic and show were abolished, and a connected well-developed
plot was substituted, simple in action, and confined to a small number
of personages. Next, the previous mixture of the tragic and comic
elements was abolished, and everything approaching to burlesque strictly
interdicted. The chief efforts in this direction were made by the Roman
Silvio Stampiglia (d. 1722), to whom Apostolo Zeno awards more of genius
and spirit than thorough cultivation,[27] and whom Arteaga calls dry and
unmusical.[28] Apostolo Zeno himself (1688-1750) followed in the
same path as court poet to Charles VI. He was a man of education and
learning, and as such sought to model the opera on ancient tragedy in
its best and most manly form, and strove for a naturally developed plot,
correct delineation of character, and simplicity of language. He proved,
said Metastasio,[29] that the opera and good sense are not absolutely
contradictory terms. The fact that his operas were often and
successfully performed during the first half of the century bears
testimony to the simplicity and earnestness of the musical taste of the
time; later on, as the field of music extended its limits, his text was
found pedantic.[30] His indisputable merit[31] was thrown into the
shade by Metastasio's works;[32] these denote in a remarkable degree the
spirit of the time which produced them, a spirit that they themselves
fostered and encouraged.
Metastasio (Pietro Trapassi, 1698-1782) distinguished himself as a
boy by his talent for improvisation; he received a thorough learned
education from the celebrated Roman
{METASTASIO.}
(169)
jurist Gravina, which led to his adoption of classical antiquity as his
model; while his connection with the singer Marianna Bulgarini early
gave him an insight into the technical requirements of the opera. He
began his career as a librettist in 1724 with "Didone" at Naples; in
1730 he went to Vienna as court poet, where he lived on the best
of terms with the Imperial family,[33] and highly esteemed by the
cultivated public. Following Apostolo Zeno, he sought to supply his
operas with a true dramatic form, and he made it his chief aim to
portray the effect of different characters and passions upon the
development of the action. Metastasio had no large or powerful
conceptions, nor could he grasp strong passions; his psychological
vision is clear and cool, but limited, just as his sentiments are
correct and good, but neither wide nor free. In his dramas, therefore,
the representation of character and the plot are well-considered,
suitable, and consistent, but with a certain mediocrity running through
the whole; he chiefly concerns himself with the exemplification of
principles and experiences, and individualises but little.[34] He makes
love the animating element of his drama, and the starting point of his
psychological study of motives. His characters want neither life nor
passion, but softness and veiled sensuality are the characteristic
features of what he endeavoured to make an imitation of actual life. The
public were gratified at recognising themselves and their love affairs
glorified on the stage, and were grateful to Metastasio for allowing
them to enjoy themselves in their own way, and not preaching moderation
and self-control. They admired his language too, which is correct, and
charmingly melodious and natural in expression, not more rhetorical
than the Italian language and poetry demands, and never overlaid with
conceits.
To these qualities of a dramatic poet, Metastasio joined that of an
operatic composer; he was a musician. He had cultivated his musical
talent by intercourse with singers and
{OPERA SERIA.}
(170)
composers, and had a ready perception of what was necessary to a work
written for composition. He sang "come un serafino" (as he writes
jokingly to Farinelli),[35] played the clavier, and composed a little
himself;[36] he found it a pleasant incitement to poetical activity to
seat himself at the clavier and improvise. He said himself he had
never written a song without composing it himself, according to his own
conception of its musical character.[37]
Metastasio confines the development of the plot as a rule to the
recitative and the arie (or duet, or terzet), expressing at the close
of each scene the sentiment which is the result of the previous action.
This they always did so clearly and precisely that the composer had both
incentive and scope for musical treatment.
The too numerous figures and metaphors (which he was fond of borrowing
from the sea) express the taste of the time, and so far from troubling
the musician, gave him opportunities for musical painting which was sure
to be admired. The melodious language met the music half way, while the
simple yet varied rhythm, the contrast of ideas, and the construction
of the verse, aided the composer, without fettering him, in the musical
phrasing of his work.
It was no wonder that Metastasio reigned supreme over the stage and its
composers, and that he was the model of the later operatic poets; they
succeeded best in imitating his defects, and gave Naumann occasion to
say with justice, "The oldest of Metastasio's operas is more pleasing to
me than any written by our present poets."
Metastasio was well aware that the poet only supplies a stem to the
opera, which the composer clothes with foliage and blossom;[38] but he
was far from allowing the composer absolute dominion over the poet, and
prided himself on the
{CONDITIONS OF LIBRETTO-WRITING.}
(171)
fact that his operas had been played with applause as tragedies without
music both in France and Germany.[39]
He chose to consider the composer as the interpreter of the poet, and
bound to follow his indications of character and style.[40] This was in
his opinion the chief merit of the old composers, and in his later years
he was never weary of deploring the decline of music, which was the
consequence of the license taken by vocalists, destroying alike truth
and beauty of expression.[41]
The poet not less than the composer found himself hemmed in by
conditions as well as by traditional formulas. He too performed his task
to order, and was hampered by circumstances, and by the limited means at
his command in his choice of subject and characters.
It was in no way favourable to Zeno and Metastasio that they received
their commissions from the court;[42] besides the direct influence
of the taste of the _somme padrone_, the whole atmosphere tended to
effeminacy and a uniform level in style. The impresarii chose the
libretti for the composers they had engaged, partly according to the
applause the subjects had already received, but more to suit the singers
they had at command. They were altered to suit the occasion sometimes by
the poet himself, but more often some local poet undertook the necessary
curtailments and additions, whereby the work seldom profited.[43]
{MOZART'S EARLY OPERAS.}
(172)
The absolute monarchy of Zeno and Metastasio, whom all other poets
slavishly imitated, would alone suffice to explain the fact that in
the course of the last century opera seria received the fixed and
unalterable form it still retains; we have seen that the tendency was
the same as regards the music. This makes it comprehensible that in
reading the text or the scores in the present day we have so lively an
impression that they are but copies of one original. In no art does the
feeling for what is enduring pass so easily and quickly into the taste
for what pleases the age as in music. What affords most delight to the
present often expresses only a transitory mood with a momentary
truth, and when the smoke and the fragrance which surrounded it have
disappeared, only an empty form remains; just as a mask keeps the
impression of the features without the play of the muscles, which alone
give life and expression.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 1: It is not known when this term came into use--both before and after
others were customary: Dramma musicale, dramma per musica, melodramma
[Footnote Menestrier]. Des représentations en musique (Paris, 1684), p. 248.]
[Footnote 2: Rochlitz, Für Freunde d. Tonk., I., p. 262. Winterfeld, Gabrieli,
II., p. 12. Kiesewetter, Schicks. d. welt. Gesanges, p. 24. E. O.
Lindner, Zur Tonkunst, p. 1.]
[Footnote 3: "Daphne" was adapted by Opitz, and composed by H. Schütz as the
first German opera; it was performed in Torgau, 1627 (Fürstenau, Zur
Gesch. d. Musik in Dresden, I., p. 97).]
[Footnote 4: Æsthetic criticism forms the chief part of Steff. Arteagas'
well-known work, Le Rivoluzioni del Teatro Musicale Italiano (Bologna,
1783-88. Ven., 1785, three vols.; translated by Forkel. Leipzig, 1782.
8). Less authentic are G. W. Fink, Wesen u. Gesch. d. Oper (Leipzig,
1835), G. Hogarth's Memoirs of the Opera (Lond., 1855), S. Edwards'
History of the Opera (London, 1862).]
[Footnote 5: Cf. Winterfeld, Zur Gesch. heil. Tonkunst, II., p. 337,]
[Footnote 6: An old copy of his Telemacco indicates it as "opera centesima nona,
recitata in Capranica l'anno 1718."]
[Footnote 7: Villarosa, Memoria dei Compositori di Musica del Regno di Napoli
(Neap. 1840).]
[Footnote 8: Ant. Groppo, Catal. di tutti Drammi per Musica recitati ne' Teatri
di Venezia dell' a 1637-1745 (Ven., 1745).]
[Footnote 9: [Al. Machiavelli] Serie cronologica dei Drammi recitati su de' publ.
Teatri di Bologna dell' a 1600-1737 (Bol.f 1737).]
[Footnote 10: Burney, Reise, I., p. 293. Cramer, Magaz. f. Mus., II., p. 50.
Kelly, Remin., I., p. 65.]
[Footnote 11: An account of the scheme of Italian opera is given in the Lettre
sur le Mécanisme de l'Opéra Italica (Naples, 1756).]
[Footnote 12: Many interesting remarks may be found in Vine. Manfredini's Regole
Armoniche (Veo., 1797), IV., 6, p. 119, dello stile serio.]
[Footnote 13: Metastasio, Opp. post., I., p 357.]
[Footnote 14: J. Brown, Letters upon the Poetry and Music of the Italian Opera
(Edinb., 1789), p. 29.]
[Footnote 15: Goldoni enumerates the practical directions given to him for
writing an operatic libretto. Mém., I., p. 102.]
[Footnote 16: Mancini gives an account of the more important among them. Rifl.
prat, sul canto fig., p. 14.]
[Footnote 17: Even in 1752 Metastasio bitterly complains of this perversion of
dramatic] Binging (Opp. post., II., pp. 94, 99, 215, 330).]
[Footnote 18: Grétry declares that he once saw a singer go behind the scenes to
suck an orange, while another on the stage continued to address him as
though he were present (Mém., I., p. 119).]
[Footnote 19: Grétry, Mém., I., p. 114.]
[Footnote 20: Arteaga (cap. 12) gives a graphic account of the downfall of the
opera, which had been incessantly bewailed ever since the publication of
Marcello's bitter satire, Il Teatro alla modo (Ven., 1722, 1738). Cf. Le
Brigandage de la Musique Italienne (Amst., 1780).]
[Footnote 21: Raguenet (Parallèle des Italiens et des François, 1702, § 26, in
Mattheson's Musik. Kritik, I., p. 141).]
[Footnote 22: Metastasio, Opp. post., II., p. 145.]
[Footnote 23: Metastasio, Opp. post., I., p. 282.]
[Footnote 24: Arteaga, Rivol., 13 t., II., p. 172 (II., p. 239, trans.),
contradicted by Manfredini (Dif. d. Mus. Med., p. 128. Cf. Rousseau,
Dictionn. de Mus., Ouverture. Weber, Hinterl. Schr., I., p. 68).]
[Footnote 25: Rousseau, Diet, de Mus., Orchestre. Kandler, Vita di Hasse, I.
Furstenau, Zur Gesch. d. Mus. in Dresden, II., p. 290.]
[Footnote 26: Sacchi, Vita di C. Broschi (Ven., 1784), p. 8. Burney, Reise, I.,
p. 153.]
[Footnote 27: Ap. Zeno, Lettres, IV., p. 21.]
[Footnote 28: Arteaga, Rivol., 10, I., p. 67 (II., p. 56).]
[Footnote 29: Metastasio, Opp. post., II., p. 409.]
[Footnote 30: Grétry, Mém., I., p. 114.]
[Footnote 31: Cf. Arteaga, I., p. 69 (II., p. 58). Goldoni, Mém., I., p. 176.]
[Footnote 32: Arteaga's criticism (Le Riv., c. 11) is in the main correct.
Hiller's (Ueber Metastasio u. seine Werke. Leipzig, 1786) is far more
partial. See also Rousseau, Dictionn. de Mus., Génie; Jacobs Nachtr. zu
Sulzer, III., p. 95; Herder, Briefe z. Bef. d. Hum., VII., p. 117; A W.
Schlegel, Vorles, 16 W, V., p. 350.]
[Footnote 33: Karajan, Aus Metastasio's Hofleben (Vienna, 1861).]
[Footnote 34: Burney remarks how the character of Metastasio is 'displayed in all
his works (Reise, II., p. 170).]
[Footnote 35: Metastasio, Opp. post., I., p. 384.]
[Footnote 36: He mentions trifling compositions (Opp. post., I., pp. 386, 402);
some are printed--e.g., 36 Canoni (Vienna Artaria, 1782).]
[Footnote 37: Metastasio, Opp. post., I., p. 384.]
[Footnote 38: Metastasio, Opp. post., II., p. 47.]
[Footnote 39: Metastasio, Opp. post., II., p. 329. Cf. Mancini, Rifl. prat,
sul canto fig., p. 234. Goldoni, Mém., I., 20, p. 110. Hagedom was of
opinion that some of Metastasio's operas were perfect tragedies (Werke,
V., p. 113), and Bodmer agreed with him (Ibid., p. 184).]
[Footnote 40: Metastasio, Opp. post., II., p. 355. In an interesting letter to
Hasse (Opp. post., I., p. 344), he dissects his Attilio Regolo,
which Hasse was about to compose, so that he may grasp the musical
characteristics; he enters into detail so minutely as to leave no doubt
of his familiarity with musical technicalities.]
[Footnote 41: Metastasio, Opp. post., II., pp. 38, 355.]
[Footnote 42: Ap. Zeno writes in his own justification (Lett., III., p. 91):
"Ho caricata poi l' opera di sentiment!, poichè questi sono ciö che più
piace alla Corte e mas-simamente al Padrone." Metastasio complains of
Farinelli's writing an opera for the court ladies, who would only play
virtuous parts (Opp. post., II., p. 39).]
[Footnote 43: Zeno (Lett., II., p. 413; VI., pp. 100, 194, 287) and Metastasio
(Opp. post., II., III., p. 164) complain bitterly of this.
As an instance: to a finished opera for five characters a sixth was
required to be added (Opp. post., II., p. 37).]
====
MOZART
BY DAVID WIDGER